bug-coreutils
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: more gcc warnings


From: Eric Blake
Subject: Re: more gcc warnings
Date: Sat, 09 Jul 2005 22:57:57 +0000

> > One more that I hadn't paid attention to - for systems with O_BINARY, the
> > macro SET_BINARY was using setmode() without a prototype,
> 
> Which include file declares setmode()?  Where is this documented?
> I looked in the cygwin web site without much luck.

cygwin's headers are poorly documented; I often resort to grepping
/usr/include.  setmode() is in <io.h>, along with get_osfhandle and
a redundant declaration of access().

> 
> > Should <stdio.h> be included in "system.h"
> 
> I'd rather not.  In fact, I'd rather system.h included less than it
> already does.
> 
> > should we redo this patch to just fix cksum.c to include <stdio.h>
> 
> Sorry, I don't follow.  cksum.c already includes <stdio.h>.

Oh, it was because of the blind #define fileno _fileno, that I was getting
the warning for an implicit definition.  Cygwin properly declares fileno()
in <stdio.h>, but does not declare _fileno.

> 
> > -# ifndef __DJGPP__
> > +# if defined __CYGWIN__
> > +#  include <io.h>
> > +#  include <stdio.h>
> > +# elif !defined __DJGPP__
> 
> What is <io.h>?  Why does both it and <stdio.h> need to be included?

<stdio.h> is not needed, but <io.h> is needed for setmode().

--
Eric Blake






reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]